Posted on 10/09/2016 3:31:16 PM PDT by NYer
Pope Francis announced his choices for new Catholic cardinals Sunday, promoting a number of well-known progressives while snubbing conservatives who were up for the job.
In all, the Pope named 17 new cardinals, including 13 who are under 80 years old and therefore eligible to participate in the conclave electing the next pope.
Notably, in his selection for cardinals from among the United States bishops, Francis named the recently appointed archbishop of Chicago, Blaise Cupich, a man with impeccable liberal credentials. He also broke with protocol by choosing Archbishop William Tobin of Indianapolis, a relatively small archdiocese never before considered important enough to have a cardinal at its helm.
On the other hand, the Pope passed over the conservative archbishops of Philadelphia, Detroit and Los Angeles—Charles Chaput, Allen Vigneron and José Gómez, respectively—despite the fact that their three important archdioceses have in recent memory always been considered “cardinalatial sees.”
Archbishop Chaput was responsible for bringing Pope Francis to the United States in September 2015, hosting the pontiff for the World Meeting of Families.
Veteran Vatican analyst John Allen noted that with his new appointments, Pope Francis had engineered a “seismic shift” in the Catholic hierarchy in the United States, and by naming just progressives, “Francis was making a statement about the direction in which he wants the American church to go.”
The Pope’s picks also underscore the very real divisions within the U.S. Catholic bishops conference.
A year ago, Archbishops Cupich and Chaput faced off over a theologically indefensible op-ed published by the Chicago Archbishop that suggested that abortion was no more important than a number of other social justice issues such as unemployment, immigration and capital punishment.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Which means your judgment on what Church teaching means, versus your leaders overall, and which makes you essentially guilty of what RCs attack evangelicals for basically doing, looking to what the NT church taught over what men say. And your stance is contrary to so much RC teaching.
It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.
...to scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]. - Est Sane Molestum (1888) Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.novusordowatch.org/est-sane-molestum-leo-xiii.htm
To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor....- Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII;
"....when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed ; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority;...
The Bishops form the most sacred part of the Church, that which instructs and governs men by divine right; and so he who resists them and stubbornly refuses to obey their word places himself outside the Church [cf. Matt. 18:18]. But obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces...
Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed.
On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en
For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty.
Quite to the contrary, ...a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord. - CASTI CONNUBII, ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI; http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x...ents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii.html
Such papal teaching as this is rejected by RCs who hold that they must ascertain the validity of teachings by popes and prelates by examination of the documented warrant for them, while criticizing Prots for essentially doing the same.
Such required judgment leads to disagreements, that of whether these teachings themselves require assent, or what magisterial level each teaching falls under, and thus what manner of assent is required, as well as what that entails, and (to varying degrees) what these teachings mean. As in,
"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ˜Father, the atheists?' Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. - http://en.radiovaticana.va/storico/...counter_is_the_foundation_of_peace/en1-694445
The Sacraments are what matter. Francis is just the chief servant of the Church. It’s the Eucharist that truly saves.
And just where in the life of the NT church in Scripture (Acts onward, which record and teachings are interpretive of the gospels) is the Eucharist preached as being what saves souls or even spiritually feeds them, versus believing the gospel and hearing the preaching of the Word of God?
“You don’t see the grave peril in this? And suppose my private judgment told me...?”
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
There is a quite false notion afoot of the definition of terms for “private judgement” which is uncovered by the following excerpt from the article
Sedevacantism and Private Judgment: Are Sedevacantists just “Protestants”?
See entire at this link
http://novusordowatch.org/2015/12/sede-private-judgment/
EXCERPT:
The following passage, once again by famous nineteenth-century American convert Dr. Orestes Brownson writing in the enormously influential Brownson’s Quarterly Review, explains these points admirably:
Here is the error of our Protestant friends. They recognize no distinction between reason and private judgement. Reason is common to all men; private judgement is the special act of an individual …. In all matters of this sort there is a criterion of certainty beyond the individual, and evidence is adducible which ought to convince the reason of every man, and which, when adduced, does convince every man of ordinary understanding, unless through his own fault. Private judgement is not so called … because it is a judgement of an individual, but because it is a judgement rendered by virtue of a private rule or principle of judgement …. The distinction here is sufficiently obvious, and from it we may conclude that nothing is to be termed ‘private judgement’ which is demonstrable from reason or provable from testimony. (Brownson’s Quarterly Review, October 1852, p. 482-3. Emphasis added.)
One what basis do you judge "holding fast" by, professions or practice? Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (James 2:18)
And what is the basis for your assurance that Rome is holding fast to the doctrine it received from the Apostles? The weight of Scripture or the statements of your church that she is doing so?
Will something similar be in the headlines next January 21st??
or will they read...
In New for Supreme Court and the Cabinet Picks, our horrible new President Sidelines Progressives, Promotes Conservatives
And; apparently; doing a helluva job of it!
Acts 15
The Council at Jerusalem
1 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses."
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. "Brothers," he said, "listen to me. 14 Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16 "'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18 things known from long ago.19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."
The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers
22 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:
Greetings.
24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Farewell.
30 So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. 33 After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. [34] 35 But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.
Disagreement Between Paul and Barnabas
36 Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." 37 Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, 38 but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. 39 They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the believers to the grace of the Lord. 41 He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.
Didn't this group; by their actions; create Protestantism?
========================================
In fact numbers of truly wise and faithful Catholics have held fast to or returned to Church teaching, as they have searched for and found Sacraments in practice as they were at the time of the last valid pontiff, that of Pope Pius XII.
WHO gets to decide the "truly wise and faithful Catholics? YOU? the local bishop? or simply those who follow the pope's leadership? Jesus DID give popes authority to change the Mass in non-essentials. There wasn't even any SINGING at Mass until MUCH later in history. There WERE no sacraments as we now know them in Jesus' time. They were slowly developed over time.
========================================
A very good sampling of where faithful can still find valid Mass and Sacraments is here: http://www.cmri.org/traditional-latin-mass-directory.shtml#USA
The original language of Jesus was Aramaic. The Latin didn't come into being until Peter went to Rome (asked by St. Paul) and died on the age-old Vatican Hill. Since Latin was the language of those ancient Romans, the Mass began in Latin.
The popes then allowed Mass to be in the vernacular, which, at Jesus' time, WAS Latin. So, what's the beef?
I do have to admit that my daily Missal, which I take to daily Mass, DOES have both the Latin on the left and English on the right. I still say the "Kyrie, eleison"; "Agnus Dei"; the "Pater Noster" and "Domine, non sum dignus..." in Latin.
========================================
One glaring example of the many heresies propogated by the invalid council is the changing of the words of consecration, which so doing, Pope Pius V had declared, makes one worthy of damnation. That was an infallible declaration, as are the official acts of all of the popes.
(In fact, it would be impossible for a future pope or one of his councils to reverse truth, as truth is unchanging.)
ONLY dogma cannot change. Orthodoxies have differences in ritual and they are still in communion with Rome.
NO pope ever changes or reverses TRUTH. None want to. Which DOGMA, eternal truth has any pope changed?
========================================
Thus it is most especially obvious that today’s “Francis” is no pope at all, for if he could as pope harm the Church and commit heresy, then the gates of hell HAVE prevailed against the Church.
The evidence thus tells the flock that he is no pope and we plead with and await the Holy Ghost to bring about a valid pope once again, even as He started the Church in the upper room, breathing upon the apostles as He truly did at that time!
The Pope did NOT elect himself. If you want to BLAME anyone for his ELECTION, blame the cardinals, red hats, for their choice.
They KNEW what Francis was all about; they KNEW him well. And, in spite of YOUR take on him, he was ELECTED by the cardinals/red hats.
========================================
And as Mary told young Francisco in Fatima (paraphrase): “YOU must pray many rosaries...”
I'm sure that he did.
Get over yourself. It's all about JESUS, loving God and each other, not about what Pope Francis may say and do. If he did/does heresy, there are MANY doctors of the Church and the cardinals, red hats, to bring him back in line. NOT your job.
And, on that note: I doubt if you will recant what you've written and WON'T believe a word I've written.
But THAT'S OKAY. This IS the Free Republic!
Sure you can....if the Crisis post Vatican II was merely about the Liturgy.
But it's not.
It's not found in Scripture.
One would think that ACTS 15 would have shown Peter's leadership.
It doesn't.
Acts 15
The Council at Jerusalem
1 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses."
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. "Brothers," he said, "listen to me. 14 Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16 "'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18 things known from long ago.19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."
The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers
22 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:The apostles and elders, your brothers,
To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:
Greetings.
24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.
Farewell.
30 So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. 33 After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. [34] 35 But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.
Because Jesus promised the Apostles the Holy Spirit would guide His Church and that evil would not prevail over it. I believe Him. His Church may grow smaller; but the faithful will still be doing things the way Christ wanted it done, guided by the Third Person of the Trinity. Christ’s Church will continue to be unified; it will continue to be holy; it will continue to be for anyone; it will continue to be faithful to the doctrines taught by the unbroken succession of Apostles. Just as He told us.
He doesn’t like the lukewarm anyway, so they are a small loss.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.